Judgment:
Sabhajeet Yadav, J.
1. On 29.10.2004, Sri Ashok Khare learned senior advocate for the petitioner and Sri R. K. Tripathi advocate for respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have been heard at length and on conclusion of hearing, the judgment was reserved.
2. The brief facts of the case are that the father of the petitioner late Hira Sri Lal Srivastava, while working as head master in the Primary School Gauspur, Hathgaon, District Fatehpur run by the Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Board, died in-harness on 9.6.1999 leaving behind him his wife, four sons and one daughter. After his death, his uneducated widow demanded the service for the petitioner, who is her second eldest son, on any class-III post under Dying-in-Harness Rules applicable to the employees (teaching and non-teaching) of Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Board. According to the case of the petitioner, he is duly qualified to be appointed as a teacher or clerk in the establishment of the respondents, but he was offered only Class-IV post in the Junior High School, Amilispal, Hathgaon, District Fatehpur, as he was told that no vacancy exists in Class-III post and his Class-IV post will be changed on availability of vacancy in Class-III post in future. Accordingly he Joined on Class-IV post as offered to him vide order dated 2.8.1999 passed by the District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur. According to the petitioner, shortly thereafter on 24.4.2000 the District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur has appointed Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta as Class-III employees in the office of Deputy Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur, in the pay scale of Rs. 3.050 and 4,590 under Dying-in-Harness Rules. They have also qualification of Intermediate. The petitioner has also filed the letter of appointment issued to Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta as Annexure-2 of the writ petition. Feeling aggrieved against the aforesaid action of the District Basic Education Officer, the petitioner has approached the Secretary Basic Education, Government of Uttar Pradesh as well as the Minister of the concerned department of education by moving applications before them. The aforesaid applications have also been filed by the petitioner as Annexures-3 and 4 of the writ petition. On the application of the petitioner it appears that some endorsement has been made to the District Basic Education Officer by the concerned Minister of the Government of Uttar Pradesh indicating therein that the petitioner may be adjusted against Class-III post. In support of his claim petitioner has also filed Government order dated 4.9.2000, issued under Section 13 (1) of Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Act, 1972 (U. P. Act No. 34 of 1972) hereinafter referred to as Act 1972, as Annexure-5 of the writ petition. Finding no favour with the concerned District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur, the petitioner has filed the instant writ petition seeking the relief to the effect that a writ, order of direction in the nature of mandamus may be issued commanding the respondents to appoint/promoted the petitioner on the post of untrained teacher or clerk at the earliest as per provisions of Dying-in-Harness Rules and further a relief has been sought for in the nature of writ, order or direction to the effect that respondent No. 3 may be directed to comply with the order of departmental Minister/Secretary of Government of U. P.
3. Dr. Chandra Pal, the then working as District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur, has filed counter-affidavit on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 in the writ petition and has come forward, inter alia, with the case that the petitioner has been offered appointment on Class-IV post on compassionate ground in the institution in question and in pursuant thereof he has joined the post without any objection and since then he is continuously working on the aforesaid post and is being paid his salary month to month. It is further averred in the counter-affidavit that there was no assurance by any of the officers/District Basic Education Officer for changing his Class-IV post in Class-III post on account of availability of vacancy in Class-III post in future. The Minister and Secretary of the department concerned have only directed for doing the needful in accordance with the provisions of law. Therefore, the petitioner can have no cause of complaint to maintain the instant writ petition before this Court for the reliefs claimed in it.
4. For better appreciation of the case of respondents, the averments contained in paragraphs 8 and 9 of the counter-affidavit are quoted herein below :
8. That the contents of paragraphs 6 and 7 of the writ petition has already been replied in the proceedings paragraphs of this affidavit, as such they are denied accordingly. However, in reply it is hereby submitted that the petitioner was never assured for changing his appointment from Class-IV to Class-III cadre, as such the averment in this respect made in para under reply is wholly false and baseless. So far as the letters of Hon'ble Minister and Secretary Basic Education are concerned, it is made clear that a direction and recommendation has been made to District Basic Education Officer for doing the needful in the interest of justice.
9. That the contents of para 8 of the writ petition are not admitted as stated being misconceived and misleading before this Hon'ble Court. In reply it is hereby submitted that in the Government order dated 4.9.2000, it has never been provided that in 'case once a person appointed in Class-IV post due to nonavailability of any Class-III post, in future on the availability of the Class-III post the said person can again to be posted from Class-IV to Class-III cadre towards the compassionate appointment. Since the petitioner is already working and obtaining salary from the date of his initial appointment, i.e., 2.8.1999 on Class-IV post, as such the petitioner cannot claim again to avail the benefit of Dying-in-Harness Rules. The allegation against the respondent No. 3 regarding mala fide and violation of constitutional provision is wholly baseless and the petitioner has made the same in para under reply just to make out his case in the instant writ petition. Rest of the averment made in para under reply being contrary to the facts hence they are denied.
5. The thrust of the submission of the counsel for the petitioner is that in view of the Government order, dated 4.9.2000, which has been made applicable with effect from 8.1.1999 having regard to the educational qualification as Intermediate, it was obligatory on the part of the respondents to offer a compassionate appointment to the petitioner on Class-III post and not on Class-IV post. In any case, shortly after the appointment of the petitioner on 2.8.1999, the other persons, namely, Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta, who have also identical educational qualification as Intermediate, have been offered appointment on Class-III post vide letter of appointment dated 24.2.2000. Therefore, the petitioner has been grossly discriminated in the matter of employment in utter violation of the provisions of Article 16(1) of the Constitution of India. Sri Khare has further contended that since in the counter-affidavit filed by the District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur, there is no averment at all specifically denying the fact that at the time of offer of appointment to the petitioner there exists no vacancy in the establishment of respondents against Class-III post and the vacancies, which were offered to Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta, have been occurred later on after appointment of the petitioner. Therefore it is established that the petitioner has been grossly discriminated in the matter of employment. In any event of the matter while considering the claim of the petitioner, the relevant provisions of Government order dated 4.9.2000 have not been adhered to. In support of his contentions the learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon the decision of Apex Court rendered in Surya Kant Kadam v. State of Karnataka and Ors., 2001 (2) AWC 1128 (SC) : 2002 SCC (L & S) 1115 and a decision of this Court rendered in Sudhakar Srivastava v. Deputy Director of Education (Secondary) 9th Region, Faizabad and Ors., 2001 (1) AWC 560 (LB) : 2001 (1) ESC 419.
6. Before dealing with the rival contentions of the parties, it is necessary to examine the aims, object and purpose of the scheme underlying in Dying-in-Harness Rules for grant of compassionate appointment. The issue of grant of compassionate appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules is not res-integra. The Apex Court and this Court have considered the issue from time to time and provided sufficient guidance for giving employment under Dying-in-Harness Rules. In the case of Smt. Sushma Gosain and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors., AIR 1989 SC 1976, in paragraph 9 of the report it was observed that :
9. We consider that it must be stated unequivocally that in all claims for appointment on compassionate grounds, there should not be any delay in appointment. The purpose of providing appointment on compassionate ground is to mitigate the hardship due to death of the bread earner in the family. Such appointment should, therefore, be provided immediately to redeem the family in distress. It is improper to keep such case pending for years, if there is no suitable post for appointment supernumerary post should be created to accommodate the applicant.
7. In the case of Director of Education (Secondary) and Anr. v. Pushpendra Kumar and Ors., AIR 1998 (3) AWC 1772 (SC) : 1998 SC 2230, while taking note of the earlier decision of the Apex Court rendered in the case of Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana, 1994 (4) SCC 138. in paragraph 8 of the judgment it was observed that :
8. The object underlying a provision for grant of compassionate employment is to enable the family of the deceased employee to tide over the sudden crisis resulting due to death of the bread earner which has left the family in penury and without any means of livelihood. Out of pure humanitarian consideration and having regard to the fact that unless some source of livelihood is provided, the family would not be able to make both ends meet, a provision is made for giving gainful appointment to one of the dependents of the deceased who may be eligible for such appointment. Such a provision makes a departure from the general provisions providing for appointment on the post by following a particular procedure. Since such a provision enables appointment being made without following the said procedure, it is in the nature of an exception to the general provisions. An exception cannot subsume the main provision to which it is an exception and thereby nullify the main provision by taking away completely the right conferred by the main provision. Care has, therefore, to be taken that a provision for grant of compassionate employment which is in the nature of an exception to the general provisions, does not unduly interfere with the right of other persons who are eligible for appointment to seek employment against the post which would have been available to them, but for the provision enabling appointment being made on compassionate grounds of the dependent of a deceased employee. In Umesh Kumar Nagpal v. State of Haryana. 1994 (4) SCC 138 : (1994) AIR SCW 2305, this Court has taken note of the object underlying the rules providing for appointment on compassionate grounds and has held that the Government or the public authority concerned has to examine the financial condition of the family of the deceased and it is only if it is satisfied that but for the provision of employment, the family will not be able to meet the crisis that a job is to be offered to the eligible member of the family. In that case the Court was considering the question whether appointment on compassionate grounds could be made against posts higher than posts in Classes-III and IV. It was held that such appointment could only be made against the lowest posts in non-manual and manual categories. It was observed at page 2308 of AIR SCW :
'The provision of employment in such lowest posts by making an exception to the rule is justifiable and valid since it is not discriminatory. The favourable treatment given to such dependent of the deceased employee in such posts has a rational nexus with the object sought to be achieved, viz., relief against destitution. No other posts are expected or required to be given by the public authorities for the purpose. It must be remembered in this connection that as against the destitute family of the deceased there are millions of other families which are equally, if not more destitute. The exception the rule made in favour of the family of the deceased employee is in consideration of the services rendered by him and the legitimate expectations and the change in status and affairs of the family engendered by the erstwhile employment which are suddenly upturned.'
8. While superseding the earlier Government order on the subject Government of Uttar Pradesh has issued an order under Clause (1) of Section 13 of the Act, 1972, on 4.9.2000, wherein a complete scheme has been provided for making appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules to the dependent of deceased teaching and non-teaching employees of Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Board, hereinafter referred to as the Board. This scheme has statutory sanction and statutory force to be enforceable in the Court of law. The Government order has retrospective operation with effect from 8.1.1999. For better appreciation of the provision underlying in Dying in Harness Scheme contained in the aforesaid Government order, it is necessary to reproduce the same in toto:
la[;k 5-5-2000&400222@99
izs'kd]
Jh ,uO jfo'kadj]
lfpo]
mkj izns'k 'kkluA
lsok eas]
f'k{kk funs'ku csO ,oa v/;{k]
mkj izns'k csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn]
y[kuA
f'k{kk vuqHkkx&3 y[ku % fnukad 4 flrEcj]2000
fo'k; & mkj izns'k csfld f'k{kkifj'kn ds vUrxZr lsokjr f'k{kdksa@f'k{k.kskjdeZpkfj;ksa dh lsokdky esa e`R;q gks tkus dh fLFkfr esa muds vkfJrksa dslsok;kstu ds lEcU/k esaA
egksn;]
mi;qZ fo'k; ij eq>s ;g dgus dkfunsZ'k gqvk gS fd 'kklukns'k la[;k 1095@15&5&95&30@82fnukad 2 Qjojh] 1996 ds vUrxZr mkj izns'k csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn ds v/khulsokjr f'k{kdksa@f'k{k.kskjdeZpkfj;ksa dh lsokdky esa e`R;q gks tkus ij muds ,d vkfJr dks ifj'kn ds v/khulsok;kstu ds lEcU/k esa O;oLFkk dh x;h FkhA ekO mPp U;k;ky; bykgkckn esa ;ksftrfjV ;kfpdk la[;k 41564@1997 latho dqekj nqcscuke ftyk fo|ky; fujh{kd] bVkok ,oa vU;] esa ekO U;kO }kjk ikfjr vkns'k fnukad27-4-1998 dh vuq'khyu esa tkjh 'kklu ds vkns'k la[;k 1634@15&11&98&1499877fnukad 8 tuojh }kjk e`rd vkfJr lsok;kstu ds lEcU/k esa fuxZr lHkh 'kklukns'kvfrfer gks tkus ds QyLo:i csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn ds v/khu lsokvksa esa e`rdvkfJr lsok;kstu dh O;oLFkk m frfFk ls ckf/kr jgh gSA
2 bl chp ekO mPp U;k;ky; ds mi;qZ fu.kZ;fnukad 27-4-98 ds fo:) latho dqekj nqcs }kjk nk;j vihy la[;k 526@98esa ekO mPp U;k;ky; dh nks lnL;h; U;k;ihB us vius vkns'k fnukad 1 Qjojh] 2000 }kjkekO mPp U;k;ky; ds iwoZorhZ fu.kZ; fnukad 27-4-98 dks fujLr dj fn;k gSA ekOmPp U;k;ky; dh nks lnL;h; ihB }kjk iz'uxr ekeyk lEcfU/kr ihB dks ekO U;k;ky; dhlaoh{kkvksa ds vkyksd esa iqufoZpkj gsrq lUnfHkZr fd;k x;k gSA
3 m ds vuqe esa 'kklu }kjk ekO U;k;ky;dh laoh{kkvksa dh Hkkouk o izkFkfed f'k{kk dh xq.kokk cuk;s j[kus dh vko';drkdks vuqHko djrs gq;s lE;d~ fopkjksijkUr mO izO csfld f'k{kk ifj'knh;f'k{kdksa@f'k{k.kskj deZpkfj;ksa dh lsokdky esa e`R;q gks tkus ij muds ifjokjds ,d vkfJr dks fuEufyf[kr 'krksZa ,oa izfrcU/kksa ds v/khu lsok;kstu dk voljiznku fd;s tkus dk fu.kZ; fy;k x;k gS%
1 mO izO lsokdky esa e`r ljdkjh lsodksads vkfJrksa dh HkrhZ ikapoka la'kks/ku fu;ekoyh] 1999 ds izkfo/kkuksa dsvuqlkj gh csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn dh lsok ds f'k{kd@f'k{k.kskrj deZpkfj;ksadh lsokdky esa e`R;q gks tkus ij e`rd deZpkjh dk ifr ;k iRuh dsUnzh; ljdkj ;kfdlh jkT; ljdkj ds LokfeRok/khu ;k muds }kjk fu;fU=r fdlh fu;e ds v/khu igys lslsok;ksftr u gks rks muds dqVqEc ds ,sls ,d lnL; dks tks] dsUnzh; ljdkj ;k jkT;ljdkj ds LokfeRok/khu ;k muds }kjk fu;fU=r fdlh fuxe ds v/khu igys ls lsok;ksftru gksA bl lEcU/k esa e`rd vkfJr vkosnudrkZ ls 'kiFk&i;= izkIr djus ds mijkUrgh mlds lok;kstu ij fopkj fd;k tk;sxkA
2 mkj izns'k csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn dsf'k{kdksa@f'k{k.kskj deZpkfj;ksa ds ,sls e`rd vkfJr tks csjkstxkj gks vkSjfu;eksa ds vUrxZr fu/kkZfjr U;wure 'kSf{kd ,oa izf'k{k.k ;ksX;rk j[krs gksa rFkkvU; izdkj ls ifj'kn dh lsok gsrq vgZ gks] dks ifj'knh; fo|ky;ksa dslgk;d v/;kid@v/;kfidk ds in ij vFkok ifj'kn ds v/khu f'k{k.kskj r`rh;Js.kh ds lcls uhps ds in ij vFkok prqFkZ Js.kh ds in ij fofgr ;ksX;rk@izf'k{k.k;ksX;rk ds vk/kkj ij lsok;kstu gsrq vkosnu djus ij HkrhZ ds lkekU;fu;eksa@izf;k dks f'kfFky djrs gq;s ifj'knh; lsok esa mi;qZ lsok;kstuij fopkj fd;k tk;sxkA
3 le;≤ ij ;Fkk la'kksf/kr mkjizns'k csfld f'k{kk v/;kid lsok fu;ekoyh] 1981 ds vuqlkj vgZ e`rd vkfJr dkslgk;d v/;kid@v/;kfidk ds in ij vkosnu djus ds fnukad ls ;FkklEHko rhu ekg dsvUnj lsok;kstu dh lqfo/kk tuin Lrj ij fj in vFkok in fj u gksus dh fLFkfresa vf/kla[; in ds fo:) iznku dh tk;sxhA
4 ,sls e`rd vkfJr tks lsok;kstu gsrq vkosnu&i;=izLrqr djus dh frfFk dks lgk;d v/;kid ds in gsrq lsok fu;eksa esa fofgr 'kSf+{kdvgZrk j[krs gksa ijUrq izf'k{k.k vgZrk ugaha j[krs@iwjhdjrs] dks vizf'kf{kr v/;kid ds :i esa lsok;kstu gsrq vkosnu djus ij ;FkklEHkorhu ekg ds vUnj lsok;kstu dh lqfo/kk iznku dh tk;sxh A ,sls e`rd vkfJr dkslsok;kstu ds ckn lEcfU/kr tuin ds ftyk f'k{kk ,oa izf'k{k.k laLFkku esaizkjEHk gksus okys csfld v/;kid izek.k&i;= ch- Vh- lh- izf'k{k.kikB~;e ds vkxkeh igys cSp esa lgk;d v/;kid@v/;kfidkds in ij fu;fer fu;qf iznku djus ds fy;s mudks ch- Vh- lh- izf'k{k.kikB~;e lQyrkiwoZd iw.kZ djuk vfuok;Z gksxk A izf'k{k.k vof/k esa mUgsavizf'k{k.k v/;kid ds :i esa fu;r osru] tSlk fd 'kklu }kjk le;≤ ijfu/kkZfjr fd;k x;k gks] ns; gksxk A csfld v/;kid izf'k{k.k ikB~;e esamkh.kZ gksus ds ckn izkFkfed fo|ky; esa lgk;d v/;kid ds in ij fu;ferfu;f iznku dh tk;sxh A
fu;qf vf/kdkjh ,oa ftyk f'k{kk ,oa izf'k{k.klaLFkku dks ;g nkf;Ro gksxk fd og izf'kf{kr v/;kid ds :i esa lsok;ksftre`rd vkfJr vH;fFkZ;ksa ds lsokjr izf'k{k.k dh O;oLFkk muds lsok;kstu dsckn izkjEHk gksus okys igys izf'k{k.k l= esa lqfuf'pr djsaxs A
,sls e`rd vkfJr dk tksmi;qZDRk lsokjr izf'k{k.k dks fu/kkZfjr vof/k esa lQyrkiwoZd iw.kZ djusesa vlQy jgrsa gSa ds fy;s ;g fodYi miyC/k jgsxk fd og prqFkZ Js.kh ds inds lkis{k fu;qf gsrq vkosnu djsa vFkok izf'k{k.k mkh.kZ djus rdvizf'kf{kr v/;kid ds :i esa fu;r osru ij cus jgsa A fdUrq izfrcU/k ;g gSfd ,sls lsokjr ch- Vh- lh- izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa dks lkekU; ch- Vh- lh-ikB~;e ds izf'k{k.kkfFkZ;ksa dh Hkkafr gh ch- Vh- lh- ikB~;e dhvuqiwjd ijh{kk gsrq fofgr fu;eksa ds vuqlkj volj vuqeU; gksaxs A fdUrq ;fnvH;FkhZ rc Hkh ch- Vh- lh- dh vfUre ijh{kk mkh.kZ djus esa foQy jgrs gSarks ,sls vH;fFkZ;ksa ds fy;s prqFkZ Js.kh ds in ds lkis{k fu;fer fu;qf dsvfrfj vU; dksbZ fodYi 'ks'kugha jgsxk A vr% ,sls vH;FkhZ tks ch- Vh- lh- ijh{kk esa vfUre :i ls foQyjgrs gSa] dks lgk;d v/;kid in ds fy;s vH;FkZu Lor% fujLr le>ktk;sxk vkSj ch- Vh- lh- ijh{kk esa vfUre :i ls foQy gksus ds ekg ds vfUredk;Z fnol ls vizf'k{kr v/;kid ds :i esa Hkh mudh fu;qf Lor% lekIrle>h tk;sxh A fdUrq ,sls vH;FkhZ ;fn prqFkZ Js.kh ds fj@vf/kla[;k inds lkis{k lsok;kstu dh izkFkZuk djrs gSa] rks ml ij fopkj fd;k tk ldsxk A
5 ,sls e`rd vkfJr tkslEcfU/kr deZpkjh dh e`R;q ds fnukad dks e`rd vkfJr ds :i esa lsok;kstu dsfy;s U;wure 'kSf{kd vgZrk b.VjehfM,V vFkok mlls vf/kd j[krs gksa vkSjcsfld f'k{kk ifj'kn ds v/khu v/khuLFk Lrjkas ij fyfid ds laoxZ dslcls uhps ds in ij lsok;kstu ds fy; vU;Fkk vgZ gksa] dks lEcfU/kr tuin esafyfid ds fj in ds lkis{k laoxZ esa lcls uhps ds in ij lsok;kstu iznkufd;k tk;sxk A
tuin esa fj ds in ij e`rd vkfJrds :i esa lsok;kstu ds fy;s izkIr leLr vkosnu&i;=ksa dh izFke vkxrizFke iznk ds vk/kkj ij iathr fd;k tk;sxk rFkk foHkkx esa fj gksusokys inksa ds lkis{k izFke vkxr izFke iznk ds fu;e dk ikyu lqfuf'pr djrsgq;s lsok;kstu iznku fd;k tk;sxk A fu;qf izkf/kdkjh rn~uqlkj e`rdvH;fFkZ;ksa dh lwph dks izR;sd ekg ds izkjEHk esa vius dk;kZy; ds lwpukiVy ij iznf'kZr djsaxs vkSj izR;sd ekg gksus okyh fjf ds lkis{klsok;ksftr e`rd vkfJr dk uke iznf'kZr djrs gq;s m lwph dk;kZy; ds lwpukiVy ij iznf'kZr djrs gq;s m lwph dks rnuqlkj la'kksf/kr dj vxys ekg dsizkjEHk esa v|kof/kd la'kksf/kr lwph dk;Zy; ds lwpuk iVy ij iznf'kZr djrsjgasxs A r`rh; Js.kh ds fj in ds lkis{k e`rd vkfJr lsok;kstu ds fy;sizR;sd vH;FkhZ ds uke fu;qf izkf/kdkjh ds dk;kZy; esa iathr gksus dhfrfFk ls ikap o'kZ dh vof/k iwjhgksus ds ekg ds vfUre dk;Zfnol rd ;fn izFke vkxr izFke iznk ds lf)kUr dsvuqlkj lsok;kstu gsrq Js.kh rhu dh fjf miyC/k ugha gksrh rks lEcfU/krvH;FkhZ dk uke iathr vH;fFkZ;ksa dh lwph ls fudky fn;k tk;sxk vkSj mlfLFkfr esa lEcfU/kr vH;FkhZ m lqfo/kk ikus ds fy;s ik= ugha jg tk;saxs]fdUrq bl vof/k ls iwoZ ;fn Js.kh pkj ds fj in@vf/kla[;kin ds lkis{k lsok;kstu gsrq viuk la'kksf/kr vkoksnu&i;= fu;qf izkf/kdkjhds dk;kZy; esa iathr djk ysa rks ml ij fopkj fd;k tk;sxk A
e`rd vkfJr ifjokj dh dfBuifjfLFkfr;ksa dks n`f'Vxr j[krs gq;s ;fn dksbZ vH;FkhZ fyfid laoxZ dsin dh fjf ds lkis{k lsok;kstu esa lEHkkfor foyEc dks n`f'Vxr j[krsgq;s ;fn rRdky lsok;kstu dh vko';drk vuqHko djrk gks rks fu;qf izkf/kdkjhds fy;s ,sls vH;fFkZ;ksa ds lEcU/k esa prqFkZ Js.kh esa fj ;k vf/kla[;inksa ds lkis{k e`rd vkfJr ds iqujhf{kr vkosnu&i;= izLrqr djus ijlsok;kstu djus dk vf/kdkj gksxk A ;gka ;g Li'V fd;k tkrk gS fd ,d ckje`rd vkfJr ds :i esa iznk lsok;kstu dh lqfo/kk ij iqufoZpkj dk dksbZvolj ugha jgsxk A
6 ,sls e`rd vkfJr ftudh U;wure'kSf{kd ;ksX;rk twfu;j gkbZLdwy gS] dks csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn ds tuinLrjh; dk;kZy; esa fj in vFkok ifj'knh; fo|ky;ksa esa prqFkZ Js.khds fj;k vf/kla[; in ij lsok;kstu dh lqfo/kk iznku dh tk;sxh A tuin Lrjh;dk;kZy; ds lEcU/k esa vf/kla[; in ds fo:) e`rd vkfJr lsok;kstu vuqeU; ughagksxk A
7 vf/kla[; in Hkfo'; esafj gksus okys inksa ds lkis{k le;≤ ij lek;ksftr fd;s tk;saxs Afu;qf izkf/kdkjh tuin dks bdkbZ ekurs gq;s fjf@vf/kla[; inksa ds fo:)e`rd vkfJrksa dks lsok;ksftr djsaxs A tuin ds dk;kZy;ksa esa fdlh Hkh vf/kla[;in ds fo:) fu;qf;ka ugh dh tk;saxh A vf/kla[; in ds in/kkjh }kjk dh x;hlsok dh x.kuk] osru fu/kkZj.k vkSj lsokfuo`fr ykHkksa ds fy;s dh tk;sxhA
8 e`rd vkfJr }kjklEcfU/kr deZpkjh ds e`R;q ds fnukad ls ikap o'kZ ds Hkhrj lsok;kstuds fy;s vkosnu izLrqr fd;k tk ldrk gS A ijUrq tgka jkT; ljdkj dh ;g lek/kkugks tk;s fd lsok;kstu ds fy;s vkosnu djus ds fy;s fu;e le;&lhek; lsfdlh fof'k'V ekeys esa vuqfpr dfBukbZ gksrh gS ogka og vis{kkvksa dhftUgsa og ekeys esa U;k;laxr vkSj lkE;iw.kZ jhfr ls dk;Zokgh djus ds fy;svko';d le>s] vfHkeq ;k f'kfFky dj ldrh gS A fu;eksa esa bl vk'k; dhvfHkeqf f'kfFkyhdj.k ds lEcU/k esa izLrko lEcfU/kr fu;qf izkf/kdkjh }kjkf'k{kk funs'kd os- ds ek/;e ls 'kklu dks izsf'kr fd;s tk;saxs A
9 mkj izns'k lsokdky esa e`rljdkjh lsodksa ds vkfJrksa dh HkrhZ ls lEcfU/kr le;≤ ij la'kksf/krfu;ekoyh dh O;oLFkkvksa ds v/khu mkj izns'k csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn dsdeZpkfj;ksa ds e`rd vkfJr dk rkRi;Z e`rd f'k{kd@f'k{ks.kskjdeZpkjh ds iq=] vfookfgr vFkok fo/kok iq=h] iRuh vFkok ifr ls gksxk A
10 e`rd vkfJr ds :i esalsok;kstu ds fy;s U;wure vk;q lhek tSlk fd lEcfU/kr lsok laoxZ ds lsokfu;eksa esa fofgr gS] gksxh A
4- Jh jkT;iky mkj izns'kcsfld f'k{kk vf/kfu;e 1972 mkj izns'k vf/kfu;e la[;k 34 o'kZ1972 dh /kkjk mi/kkjk 1 ds vUrxZr ;g vkns'k nsrs gS fd mi;q fu.kZ;ds vuqlkj dk;Zokgh lqfuf'pr dh tk;s A
5- ;g vkns'k fnukad 8-1-1999 lsizHkkoh ekuk tk;sxk A
6- ;g vkns'k fok foHkkx dsv'kkldh; la[;k vkbZ- ,Q- ,-&2 1490@nl@2000fnukad 29-8-2000 esa izkIr mudh lgefr ls fuxZr fd;s tk jgs gSaa A
Hkonh;
g-
,u- jfo'kadj
lfpo
la[;k 5193 1@15-5-2000200 15-5-2000 200 222 99] rn~fnukad
izfrfyfi fuEufyf[kr dks lwpukFkZ,oa vko';d dk;Zokgh gsrq isf'kr %
1- funs'kd] ,l- lh-bZ- vkj- Vh-] y[ku]
2- lfpo] mkjizns'k csfld f'k{kk ifj'kn] bykgkckn A
3- leLr ftyk csfldf'k{kk vf/kdkjh] m- iz- A
vkKk ls
g-
fnus'k pUnz dukSft;k
fo'ks'k lfpo A**
9. A scrutiny of the aforesaid Government order dated 4.9.2000 reveals that in case of death of any teaching or non-teaching employee of the Board during the course of service, one member of deceased employee will be considered for grant of compassionate appointment in terms and conditions as laid down in the afpresaid Government order. The details of terms and conditions have been elaborately mentioned. In Clause (1) of paragraph 3 of the aforesaid Government order it is stated that compassionate appointment to the dependent of deceased employee of the Board may be given according to the Dying in Harness Rules applicable to the Government employees. In Clause (2) of paragraph 3 of the Government order the posts upon which compassionate appointment may be offered are enumerated which, inter alia, provides that compassionate appointment may be given on the post of assistant teacher in the primary school and on the lowest post in Class-III service or Class-IV post having regard to the educational qualification and experience, by relaxing the rules of recruitment. In Clause (3) of paragraph 3 it has been specifically mentioned that compassionate appointment on the post of assistant teacher may be given to the dependent of deceased employee against any vacant post at district level or in absence of vacancy on supernumerary-post provided the candidate is eligible for appointment on the post of teacher under Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Teachers Services Rules, 1981 as amended from time to time. In Clause (4) of paragraph 3 of the aforesaid Government order specific provision has been made for appointment to the dependent of deceased employee on the post of assistant teacher, who is untrained, but have academic qualification according to the service rules.
10. Clause (5) of paragraph 3 of the aforesaid Government order specifically deals with the cases of dependents of deceased employees, who possess Intermediate qualification or above and have applied for Class -III post in clerical cadre. They may be given employment at the lowest post in clerical cadre against vacant posts. In the aforesaid paragraph the further provision has been made to the effect that for providing employment against the vacant posts in clerical cadre at district level, all the applications have to be registered on the basis of the principle of 'first come first serve' and the appointing authorities are required to publish the list of dependents of deceased employee at the notice board of their office and further after appointment against vacant posts in every month, the aforesaid list has to be modified for next coming month and the same shall also be placed and published at the notice board of their office. If no vacancy in Class-III post occurs within five years and the candidates applied for appointment against Class-III posts, could not be given appointment in Class-III post in the aforesaid period of five years. In that event of the matter, their names from the aforesaid list shall be deleted and such candidates shall not be eligible for seeking appointment against Class-III post, but before the expiry of the aforesaid period of five years, if such candidates place their revised/amended applications for appointment against Class-IV posts and get them registered in the office of appointing authority, the same can be considered. It is further provided that in case if any dependent of deceased employee having regard to the financial scarcity and poverty of his family, could not be in a position to wait much time for appointment against Class-III post and seeks immediate employment and makes revised/amended application for appointment against Class-IV post either against available vacancy or against any supernumerary post, then the appointing authority can make appointment either against any vacancy of Class-IV post or against any supernumerary post and once such appointment is made, the same cannot be re-opened.
11. Before applying the provisions of the aforesaid G.O. another question arises for consideration is that since the Government order dated 4.9.2000 came into being subsequent to the appointment of the petitioner, though it has retrospective effect with effect from 8.1.1999, what would be the legal effect of the aforesaid Government Order in the facts and circumstances of the case. In this regard it is to be noted that the Government Order dated 4.9.2000, has been made applicable with effect from 8.1.1999 as indicated in paragraph 5 of the Government Order, meaning thereby this Court has to assume the things by way of legal fiction from the date when the Government Order has become operative on 8.1.1999 and the right and obligation of the parties have to be decided keeping the view in mind the aforesaid date for the purpose of commencement of the aforesaid Government Order. Besides this, in the aforesaid Government Order there is no indication at all to the effect that the appointment already made prior to issuance of the aforesaid Government Order will not be affected on account of operation of the Government Order having its retrospective effect. In absence of any indication in the Government Order itself since it is beneficial piece of legislation, therefore a liberal construction has to be given in favour of the beneficiary of the Government Order. By viewing the matter from this angle the necessary consequence which flows from the aforesaid Government Order is that having regard to the educational qualification of the petitioner as Intermediate, the appointing authority is required to consider the claim of petitioner for grant of compassionate appointment against Class-III post.
12. It is necessary to mention here that the petitioner has sought relief of mandamus either for appointment on the post of untrained teacher or on the post of clerk under Dying-in-Harness Rules. Therefore, it is necessary to examine as to whether he could have been considered for compassionate appointment as untrained teacher. Since under the aforesaid Government order in order to claim employment under Dying-in-Harness Rules in teaching staff on the post of assistant teacher in the primary school run by the Board, the candidate is required to satisfy the eligibility criteria to be appointed as teacher under Uttar Pradesh Basic Education Teachers Services Rules, 1981. Rule 8 of the aforesaid rules prescribes the academic qualification for appointment on the post of Assistant Teacher, a candidate must have Bachelor Degree from a University established by law in India or a degree recognized by the Government as equivalent thereto together with training qualification like BTC, HTC, JTC, CT or any other training course recognized by the State Government as equivalent thereto. Although under the Government Order a provision has been made to appoint untrained teacher and permit the appointee to complete training course during the course of employment, but since the petitioner is lacking essential academic qualification of Bachelor degree, therefore, his claim cannot be considered for appointment on the post of assistant teacher even as an untrained teacher that, is why it appears that the learned counsel for the petitioner did not press the aforesaid relied claimed in the writ petition.
13. Although the petitioner has mentioned in the writ petition that the departmental Minister has directed the District Basic Education Officer. Fatehpur to appoint him in clerical cadre and endorsement to the said effect has been made on the application of the petitioner. In this regard it would be sufficient to say that unless the Government issue any order in conformity with the provisions of Article 166 of the Constitution of India, the same has no legal effect and consequence. Therefore, the alleged noting and endorsement by the departmental Minister on the application of the petitioner for his appointment against Class-III post is of no legal consequence. It is well-settled law that the noting on the office file either by the departmental authority or by the Minister does not confer any right in whose favour it is made, that is why it appears that the learned counsel for the petitioner did not press the issue in his argument.
14. Now the question for consideration is that as to whether any vacancy against Class-III post in the establishment of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 was existing at the time of offer of appointment to the petitioner on Class-IV post. In this regard the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that in the counter affidavit filed on behalf of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 there is no specific denial that there exists no vacancy against Class-III post on the date of offer of appointment to the petitioner against Class-IV post, but simultaneously I found no material on record to establish that there exists any vacancy in Class-III post in the establishment of respondent Nos. 2 and 3 either on the date of application of the petitioner or on the date of offer of appointment made to him against Class-IV post. Therefore, tills question requires further probe in the matter for all fairness is to be done by some authority higher to the appointing authority. After due enquiry if it is found that on the date of offer of appointment to the petitioner, I.e., on 2.8.1999 any vacancy against Class-III post in the district was available, it was required to be offered to the petitioner on the basis of principle of 'first come first serve' and in case there exists no such vacancy in Class-III post in the district and the petitioner has moved his revised application for Class-IV post to the appointing authority, only in that event of the matter the appointing authority could have offered appointment to the petitioner against Class-IV post and not otherwise in accordance with Clause (5) of paragraph 3 of the Government order dated 4.9.2000. If it is found that on the date of appointment of petitioner any vacancy against Class-III post in the district was not available in that event of the matter he ought to have been asked either to wait for occurrence of such vacancy or revise his application for Class-IV post. The offer of appointment to the petitioner against Class-IV post and acceptance by him without following the aforesaid procedure is of no legal consequence and cannot be taken to be any way-impediment in accepting the claim of the petitioner against Class-III post. It is also necessary to make it clear that right to be considered for compassionate appointment may be understood in the terms of any statutory or vested right in the legal parlance, rather it should be construed and meant in the terms of Dying-in-Harness Rules applicable to the Government employees inasmuch as the provisions contained in the Government order in question. Therefore, it is dependent upon the terms and conditions laid down for compassionate appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules applicable to the Government employees inasmuch as the scheme underlying in the Government order in question applicable to the dependents of deceased employees of the Board.
15. Now the next question arises for consideration as to whether the petitioner has been discriminated in the matter of consideration for emplayment vis-a-vis to other persons mentioned in the writ petition. In this regard the counsel of the petitioner has contended that Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta, who have also identical academic qualification to the petitioner as Intermediate, have been offered appointment against Class-III post on 24.4.2000, but the petitioner has been discriminated in the matter of employment. In this regard it is to be noted, as indicated in the earlier part of the judgment that in case the provisions of Clause (5) of paragraph 3 of the Government order dated 4.9.2000, is implemented and the principle of 'first come first serve' is applied, the position would be otherwise. In this regard it is to be seen that as to when the petitioner has moved application. If it is found that the petitioner has moved his application prior in time than that of Sri P?wan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta, he would have offered appointment first on occurrence of vacancy in Class-III post in the district. In case the applications of Sri Pawan Kumat Uttam and Smt. Sweta are found earlier in point of time, they could be dealt with in accordance with the provisions of the aforesaid Government Order. In order to decide this question, further probe is needed by the authority as indicated in the earlier part of the judgment and for that purpose he is also required to give an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta in the time frame to be indicated hereinafter. In support of his contention learned counsel for the petitioner Sri Ashok Khare has relied upon a decision of the Apex Court rendered in Surya Kant Kadam (supra). The facts and circumstances of the instant case are different and distinguishable from the facts of the aforesaid case. In the aforesaid case on the death of his -father, the appellant was given a compassionate appointment as Second Division Assistant/Clerk, even though he had applied for the post of Sub-Inspector of Excise and did possess the necessary qualification for the said post. Respondent Nos. 3 and 4 whose father also died while in service were appointed similarly as Second Division Assistant/Clerk on 9.1,1978 and 19.12.1979 respectively. Those respondent Nos. 3 and 4 while continuing as Second Division Assistant/Clerk were later on promoted/appointed as Sub-Inspector of Excise on 3,10.1987 and 27.4.1988. The appellant, who had been earlier appointed on compassionate ground as Second Division Assistant/Clerk and was entitled to be considered for appointment as Sub-Inspector of Excise was not considered when respondent Nos. 3 and 4 were appointed as Sub-Inspector of Excise. Therefore, in the aforesaid context the Apex Court has held that the appellant of the aforesaid case has been discriminated in the matter of employment, but in the case in hand from the materials available on record there is nothing to establish at this stage that the petitioner as well as Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta has simultaneously applied under Dying-in-Harness Rules against Class-III post or they have applied later on and vacancies against Class-III post were already existing in the district. Therefore, it cannot be said at all at this stage that the petitioner has been met any discriminatory treatment vis-a-vis to Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta unless the aforesaid facts are probed by the authority to be indicated hereinafter in this judgment in the time frame to be indicated in it.
16. Learned counsel for the petitioner has also placed reliance upon another decision of this Court rendered in the case of Sudhakar Srivastava (supra). The aforesaid case is also distinguishable on the facts, as the aforesaid case relates to the case of compassionate appointment on the post of assistant teacher in LT Grade in Government aided prtvately managed Secondary School, wherein different scheme of Dying-in-Harness Rules underlying in Regulations 101 to 106 and 107 framed under Chapter-III of the U. P. Intermediate Education Act, 1921 was under consideration. Here in the case In hand different scheme of Dying in Harness Rules underlying in the Government order dated 4.9.2000, is under consideration. Therefore, the aforesaid case cited by the learned counsel for the petitioner can be of no assistance to the petitioner.
17. Now the next question arises for consideration that which relief can be granted to the petitioner in this writ petition. In this regard, as observed in the preceding part of the judgment, it is pertinent to mention here that now-a-days rampant corruption in the public life has become a national malady. Therefore, I am of the considered view that the Director of Basic Education, who is Chairman of the Board. have power and jurisdiction to supervise and superintendence over the affairs of administration, may be directed to enquire into the matter by summoning the record from the office of District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur in respect of the application moved by the petitioner as well as by Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta and probe the existence of vacancies against Class-III post in the district concerned and applications moved against such vacancies under Dying-in-Harness Rules in the district and the registration of such application from the office of District Basic Education Officer, Fatehpur and decide the controversy by affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as Sri Pawan Kumar Uttam and Smt. Sweta within a period of three months. In case if it is found that on the date of application of the petitioner, there was any vacancy in Class-III post in the district, he may be offered appointment against Class-III post on the principle of 'first come first serve'. In case the vacancies have occurred later on after appointment of the petitioner against Class-IV post and he has made application for appointment against Class-III post and has not moved another revised application for appointment against Class-IV post, his claim is required to be considered for appointment against Class-III post on the principle of 'first come first serve' inspite of the fact that he has been appointed against Class-IV post. If it is found that any vacancy in Class-III post was not existing in the district concern at the time of appointment of petitioner on Class-IV post and on account of possible delay in occurrence of vacancy in Class-III post, he could not have waited for occurrence of such vacancy due to his pressing need of employment having regard to financial stringency and poverty of his family, he has submitted his revised application for appointment on Class-IV post in that eventuality alone his appointment on Class-IV post need not to be re-opened and not otherwise. While probing of the vacancies against Class-III post in the district, the Director of Basic Education is required to state the manner of occurrence of vacancies also as to how and when the vacancies have occurred and as to whether they have been occurred on account of death/retirement or otherwise and the date of occurrence of vacancies is required to be mentioned in the order. It is made further clear that the appointment on supernumerary post can only be made on Class-IV post and on the post of assistant teacher in the primary school run by the Board. There can be no claim for compassionate appointment on supernumerary post in Class-III. It is also made clear that while deciding the controversy, Director Basic Education is expected to pass reasoned and speaking order.
18. Before parting with the judgment, I must appreciate the transparent policy of the Government in respect of appointment under Dying-in-Harness Rules contained in the Government order dated 4.9.2000. To my mind the aforesaid transparent policy of the Government cannot be properly and effectively implemented on account of rampant corruption in the public life and other sort of favouritism, nepotism and so many other factors, which determines the functioning of Government/public functionaries in day to day working unless some monitoring cell is constituted at regional level and at head office level by the Government whereunder the Regional Officer at regional level and the Chairman of the Board/Director of Basic Education at head office level may be held responsible for proper and effective implementation of the aforesaid Government order. Therefore, I direct that within three months the Government may take steps to constitute monitoring cell at regional level and at head office level to supervise and ensure proper and effective implementation of the Government order dated 4.9,2000 in respect of appointment under Dying-In-Harness Rules underlying in the aforesaid Government order. The Registrar General, High Court is directed to communicate the copy of this judgment to the Secretary of Basic Education, Government of Uttar Pradesh as well as the Chief Secretary of Government of Uttar Pradesh for its compliance and necessary action.
19. The petitioner is directed to move an application along with certified copy of this judgment before the Director of Basic Education Uttar Pradesh, within 15 days from today who is directed to pass appropriate order in the light of observations and directions made in the body of the judgment within three months.
20. With the aforesaid observations and directions this writ petition is disposed of finally. The parties shall bear their own costs.